If you had been paying any attention to this thread you would know that graphic is unreliable. Temperature swings in the past 20,000 years were much more profound than that smooth rise and fall represented in the graphic.

But none nearly as profound as the last one... the one that fucking matters..

Note the scale. Other than super volcanoes and asteroid strikes, nothing nearly as sudden and distinct..

Congrats, you have overtaken WMD as the most out of touch true believer in this thread. Notice how the graph you are defending is a cartoon with no sourcing? Notice how it doesn't show any of the massive Younger Dryas spikes? Notice all the smaller spikes in the last 10,000 years (which aren't associated with asteroids or volcanoes)? Those swings are upwards of of 3 degrees celcius, none of which show up in your cartoon.

I love this thread. Itís like watching Christians and Atheists argue over the existence of God. Everyone is dead set in their belief and no one changes their mind. Keep going.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

so what do you believe--or do you just sit back and amuse yourself and not give a shit about the future? I think I'd rather deal with a Kochite like RJ than someone who considers themselves above it all.

Congrats, you have overtaken WMD as the most out of touch true believer in this thread. Notice how the graph you are defending is a cartoon with no sourcing? Notice how it doesn't show any of the massive Younger Dryas spikes? Notice all the smaller spikes in the last 10,000 years (which aren't associated with asteroids or volcanoes)? Those swings are upwards of of 3 degrees celcius, none of which show up in your cartoon.

We have these different proxies that give us information about past climate and ideally you don’t rely on just one. Instead you use a multi-proxy approach, multiple records to reconstruct the changes that have been going on. Things like tree rings, the composite oxygen isotope record, an aggregation of ocean core data, ice-core samples, etc.

The key is global mean temperature, not regional variations. With global mean temperature regional spikes are smoothed out. A chart based on global mean temperature would, for obvious reasons, be smoother than a local proxy.

Whereas you keep cherry-picking data that appears to support your oftentimes specious arguments.

so what do you believe--or do you just sit back and amuse yourself and not give a shit about the future? I think I'd rather deal with a Kochite like RJ than someone who considers themselves above it all.

I learned a long time ago there is no personal satisfaction getting involved in religious debates. I prefer being amused by those arguing. Please, continue.

We have these different proxies that give us information about past climate and ideally you donít rely on just one. Instead you use a multi-proxy approach, multiple records to reconstruct the changes that have been going on. Things like tree rings, the composite oxygen isotope record, an aggregation of ocean core data, ice-core samples, etc.

The key is global mean temperature, not regional variations. With global mean temperature regional spikes are smoothed out. A chart based on global mean temperature would, for obvious reasons, be smoother than a local proxy.

Whereas you keep cherry-picking data that appears to support your oftentimes specious arguments.

You think I don't know this? I am merely pointing out how fake that unsourced cartoon is. It makes it appear as if there are no sudden temperature swings except for the past 150 years for which we have instrumental records. I often use the Greenland ice core record because it is the highest resolution record we have for the past 20,000 years. Here's some more:

Boy. Sure would be nice if somebody could do ANYTHING about getting those knuckleheads to quit clearing out the rainforests in record numbers down South, but nope! Seems we're more worried about plastic straws and cow farts than things that could make DRASTIC differences in our climate.

Deforestation is the second leading cause of global warming and produces about 24% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Scientist say that deforestation in tropical rainforests adds more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere than the sum total of all the cars and trucks on the world’s roads. In some countries, such as Brazil and Indonesia, deforestation and forest degradation together are by far the main source of national greenhouse gas emissions.
...
Combating deforestation has been identified as one of the most promising and cost-effective ways to lower emissions.